Tag:

Decision Making

BlogMyers-BriggsUsing MBTI to Great Advantage

Using MBTI to Great Advantage – Energizing

by Ron Potter

Using MBTI to Great Advantage is a blog series in which I’ll do an overview of each of the four Myers-Briggs (MBTI) functions and then in subsequent blogs will dig into each one in more depth with some practical applications for creating better dynamics and better decisions making. Click here to read the Series Introduction.

Energizing Overview: Extroversion vs IntroversionMBTI series header

Unfortunately the two words associated with this function carry a lot of preconceived baggage. We think of the outgoing, gregarious, easy to talk with extroverted type or the shy, quite, retiring introverted type. And while we may see some of those characteristics in this function, that’s not what is getting measured here.

This is your “energizing” function. When you need to get creative, solve a problem, grapple with an issue, deal with alternatives, how do you get energized around the solution?

  • Extraverts need to talk. While talking our energy seems to grow, ideas start falling into place, internal decisions get made and finally, right during the conversation our fingers snap and our brain says “That’s it. I’ve got it.” The extroverted conversation energized us.
  • Introverts on the other hand need to reflect. They may do just as much talking with colleagues and others to gather as much input as possible and will likely do a lot more reading and studying but at some point, they just need to let all of that information come together in their head as their introverted thoughts process all that they’ve learned and put it into a structure that makes sense to them. At that moment they express an inward (and sometime outward) smile and their brain says “That’s it. I’ve got it.”

Greatest confusion and misunderstanding.
Because of how these two functions work so differently, it has been my observation that this function is at the root of most miscommunication and misunderstanding between team members and one of the biggest causes of wasted effort in team meetings. I’ll be giving you a lot of examples and solutions for making this function work well for you and the team in future blogs.

Don’t assume you know.
One last thought on the Energizing function. Because we think we know what (or who) an extravert and introvert is, we arm-chair psychologists make the most mistakes with this function. I have worked with talkative introverts and quiet extraverts. Do Not make assumptions on this function. You’ll often be wrong and create more misunderstanding and confusion. I’ll repeat the following statement many times because it’s so important: Don’t try to figure out if a person has an extroverted or introverted preference, just learn to balance your process so that both types flourish and contribute to the dialogue and decision making.

Remember, the three rules for using this function effectively:
1. Balance
2. Balance
3. Balance

Learn to process team dynamics in a balanced way and learn to balance your own preferences. You’ll be seen as a better leader and your teams will be identified as high-performance teams.

Share with us some of your experiences with this function both from a personal understanding or a team dynamic impact.

1 comment
0 FacebookTwitterEmail
BlogTeam

Decide: We’ve Got it All Backwards

by Ron Potter

I’ve learned this concept from Chris McGoff. In his book, The Primes: How Any Group Can Solve Any Problem, Chris lays out numerous frameworks on how teams work. One of the most powerful for me and many of my teams is understanding the meaning of the word “Decide.”

I’m not trying to be morbid here, but what do the following words have in common?: pesticide, homicide, suicide, genocide? They all end in “cide.” In Latin, the word means kill, killer, murderer, to cause death. One of my clients who was a Latin student said there was even an indication of public execution—to put to death publicly.

So, if we go back to our word decide, it doesn’t mean to figure out what to do, it means to figure out what to kill.

If leaders and teams would actually start killing off the options or directions they’ve decided not to pursue, a great amount of resources could be saved and redirected toward the chosen path.

When you must decide, figure out what you’re going to kill and publicly execute it.

Image Source: Brandon Doran

Image Source: Brandon Doran

All too often, we decide what we’re going to do and we muster the resources to pursue that option. But no one tells the many people down through the organization what to stop doing. And in fact, there’s lots of momentum in the life of the organization for people to continue doing what they’ve been doing over the last several months or years. If you don’t publicly execute that work, they’ll naturally continue to do it.

As I was working through this concept with one of my clients, one team member said, “But we’re really good at prioritizing our work.” And she was right. The organization was really good at knowing which issues should receive top priority and the most resources. But as we continued to pursue the concept, it became painfully obvious how many resources were being applied to extremely low priority items. In fact, by deciding to kill off those low priority items it was astounding how many resources would be freed up to concentrate on the things that really need to be accomplished.

When faced with a team or leadership decision, decide what to kill and then publicly execute it and you’ll be amazed at how many more resources you have available to pursue the path of success.

Why do we have such a hard time killing off projects, initiative, lines of work or almost anything that people have been dedicating their time to? I can think of several reasons but what’s your experience? Share with us.

1 comment
0 FacebookTwitterEmail
Short Book Reviews

Top Brain, Bottom Brain

by Ron Potter

top brain bottom brainRon’s Short Review: We seem to be very aware of the right brain, left brain concept.  This book gives us a little more balanced view by explaining that the right/left sides are always working together and a better concept is to look at what the top brain, bottom brain do differently.  Very interesting.

Amazon-Buy-Buttonkindle-buy button

0 comments
0 FacebookTwitterEmail
BlogCulture

Boundaries vs Fences

by Ron Potter
Image Source: Alex Juel, Creative Commons

Image Source: Alex Juel, Creative Commons

I recently spent a day with Fritz Seyferth, one of my consulting colleagues. Fritz has a unique background and style that makes him one of the most effective Leadership, Team Building and Culture building consultants I know. Check out his “Foundation of Winning”.

One of the principles that Fritz emphasizes in his consulting work is the importance of boundaries. Boundaries help set and define the culture. Boundaries actually demand more creativity and innovation to keep organizations moving forward. Boundaries are very important and useful for the health and growth of an organization (and individual). But, aren’t boundaries restrictive and inhibiting?

As usual I often learn more from observing my grandchildren then they ever learn from me. Both sets of grandchildren have fenced in back yards. In the back yard fences keep them safe, secure and contained. And in fact, the “boundaries” of play and activity tend to stay inside a parameter that is even within and smaller than the space defined by the fence.

As I observe some corporate cultures I notice that when leaders erect “fences” employees seldom even test the boundaries. In fact I often hear of hidden or invisible rules that keep people away from the fences.
“Oh, we’re not allowed to do that.”
“That would never be acceptable to our boss.”
“There are consequences for going there.”
The playing field actually becomes smaller than the playing surface.

Front yards however are defined by boundaries. There are no fences and the boundaries have to be clearly pointed out and defined to the children.
“That’s the neighbor’s yard.”
“Don’t go into the street.”
“You’re not allowed to go past the corner.”
However, boundaries are almost continually tested and reset. Unlike the backyard the entire world is beyond the front yard boundaries. If we don’t test and continually expand the boundaries of the front yard, we will never explore the world or discover what’s possible.

I’m beginning to think that we should be very clear in our businesses what is a back yard fence and what is a front yard boundary. I work with companies in the pharmaceutical, food and automotive industries among others. Drug and food safety better be a back yard fence. Manufacturing quality better be a back yard fence. There should be severe and immediate consequences for climbing over the fence.

However, when we’re exploring the world in front of us we better be thinking more of boundaries. If people violate our boundaries here we want to know why. We need to have the conversation about why someone stepped out and tried something new and radical. Should that be acceptable? Have things changed? Did they discover a new environment with new opportunities? We certainly should not simply abandon our boundaries. But, innovation happens at the boundaries. New ideas come in from the boundaries. Opportunities are seen from the boundaries.

I think it’s important for you and your company to discuss what is a back yard fence verses what should be a front yard boundaries. There are actually dire consequences if we confuse or don’t distinguish the two. Leaving back yard quality and safety to a boundary discussion will kill a company. Fencing in the front yard will arrest our growth and development keep us from exploring what the world has to offer.

0 comments
0 FacebookTwitterEmail
BlogTeam

Horns of a Dilemma

by Ron Potter
Image Source: Martin Fisch, Creative Commons

Image Source: Martin Fisch, Creative Commons

 

“Boy do we have a dilemma!”
“This has presented a real dilemma.”
“This decision is so hard to make because it’s a real dilemma.”

I hear these kinds of statements all the time in my corporate world as well as in my civilian life. What are people saying when they talk of having a dilemma? Usually they want to make the “right” decision but it’s difficult to figure out which is the right decision or the best decision or the least damaging decision. Do you notice that there is a sense of right vs wrong or better vs best or least vs most in those words. Well, if that’s the case, you’re not faced with a dilemma, you’re just making a tough decision. The decision will (or should be) made for the right, best or most side of the scale, it’s just hard.

A dilemma is presented when you’re faced with making the right vs right, or the best vs best or the most vs most. Dilemmas are equally right! That’s what makes them a dilemma.

The original definition (without getting too deep into the word construction) meant the horns of a bull; thus, being on the horns of a dilemma. The idea is that you are about to get gored by one or the other horn, but you get to choose. Note that you’re going to be gored either way. Choosing which decision to make will not prevent you from getting gored! Now that’s a dilemma!

In the rapid paced world of today with global implications, I believe we are faced with more and more decisions that become true dilemmas. It’s not the case anymore that we’re faced with five “must do” activities to keep us competitive and all we need to do is prioritize them. No, today we are faced with five must do activities but we only have the resources and time to accomplish three of them. Which ones do we decide to kill (read the earlier blog on “Have We Decided Yet?”)? Now we’re facing a dilemma.

It’s when the goring for our decision happens at a later date when no one remembers (or admits to remembering) that we chose to get gored by one side of the decision. Today we’re getting beat up (gored) by the boss or the market place for lower sales volumes when we knew that would happen based on the price increase we took because of global commodity increases.

When you’re faced with a dilemma it’s important that you decide which alternative to kill, publicly execute the alternative and publicly record the expected consequences of that decision. Don’t look for someone to blame later, look at the consequences of your decisions to see if they were what you expected. Congratulate yourself if they are what you expected. Analyze your decision making process for improvement if they were not what you expected.

0 comments
0 FacebookTwitterEmail
BlogTeam

Have We Decided Yet? Probably Not!

by Ron Potter
Image Source: Garrett Coakley, Creative Commons

Image Source: Garrett Coakley, Creative Commons

One of my clients (thanks Mindy) recently introduced me to a book called The Primes: How Any Group Can Solve Any Problem by Chris McGoff. While I’ve found several useful concepts in the book one of the most powerful is the definition of the word “decide.” Notice the make-up of the word: De-Cide.

What do the words pesticide, homicide, fungicide have in common? They (and many others) all end in “cide.” The – cide ending originates from the Latin word caedere meaning to kill. It concerns death, destruction, extermination and deliberate killing. There is even a public execution connotation to the word meaning “to put to death.”

In our corporate world we’ve mistakenly come to believe that when we decide, we’re making a decision about what “to do.” But when we decide what to do, we never decide what to stop. It’s a little bit like the overwhelming morass that our governments have gotten into; every year our legislatures add more and more laws to the books, they just never kill any and so our laws and regulations have become so voluminous we can hardly act freely any more. In our corporate life when we continually decide what to do and seldom decide what to stop doing we spread our precious resources thinner and thinner.

See if you can make this shift with your team. When faced with a decision, spend more time figuring out which alternative you are going to kill. Figure out the consequences of killing that particular option. You’ll notice some deep seated attachment and engagement that you never uncovered when you were decide which alternative to “do.” There will be many people in your organization that may have spent many years honing their skills performing the alternative that you’re about to kill. How do you think they’ll react? They’ll do everything they can to preserve their job and skill set. They’ll do it overtly. They’ll do it covertly. But this is exactly what happens when you decide what to “do” versus what to kill. While the priorities have shifted to the more important task that you decided to “do”, nobody told the people doing the other alternative to stop or shift their resources to the higher priority item or to cut their project to the bare essentials. Thus, we are constantly looking for resources to accomplish all of the high priority items and we create work forces that feel overwhelmed and over extended.

Instead, try deciding. Try deciding what to kill. Try dealing with the fall out and consequences of telling people that we’re no longer doing that activity or project. Help them get reassigned, retrained, more engaged in the activities that you’re not killing.

Maybe you’re very good at prioritizing your work. However, when you prioritize your list of 30 activities rather than deciding which ones to kill, you will still have a huge amount of resources working on priorities 16-30. If you will decide, you’ll notice that you have more than enough resources to accomplish the top 15 priorities.

Start de-ciding! You’ll find yourself and your company suddenly much more productive.

1 comment
0 FacebookTwitterEmail
Newer Posts
Older Posts